CO2 and Climate change - my pet hate

by Barry Walls

Posted: 16 years ago 29 replies

OFF TOPIC

The climate is changing...its always been changing, it always will change. The earth is not an encapsulated climate...we're mostly effected by the sun...we're in its climate...not in our own
climate bubble. The sun causes climate change.

People who think that CO2 emissions are making the earth warmer haven't looked at the data.

Al Gores hockey stick graph is a computer error...atmospheric CO2 increases trail warmer temperatures by hundreds of years as the sea warms up...increased atmospheric CO2 is an effect of warmer temperatures, not a cause of them.

Barry

#change #climate #co2 #hate #pet

myob

16 years ago

To a very narrow extent, you are correct. Volcanoes also emit CO2) which does have a warming effect. Human activities now however emit 130 times as much CO2 as volcanoes (whose emissions are relatively modest compared to some earlier times). For example, when global temperatures become warmer, carbon dioxide is released from the oceans.

When changes in the Earth's orbit trigger a warm period, increasing concentrations of CO2 amplifies the warming by enhancing the greenhouse effect. When temperatures become cooler, CO2 enters the ocean and contributes to additional cooling. During at least the last 650,000 years, CO2 levels have tended to track the glacial cycles. That is, during warm interglacial periods, CO2 levels have been high and during cool glacial periods, CO2 levels have been low. Now we are experiencing the highest levels of CO2 in our atmosphere than ever before over the last 650,000 years.

That's CO2 levels of 382ppm within the last two hundred years compared to an average CO2 level of 225ppm over the last 650,000 years. If you look at the data, I think we can see a trend here. Al Gore was right. Since he invented the internet, CO2 has been increasing at an even faster rate.

Thanks
3 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[13799].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Volcanoes majorly cause cooling because of the ash they eject. The particles are large enough to block sun entry enough that trapping heat is completely counteracted. Right now we are in a cooling trend - and a major volcano would be catostrophic - and not because it would heat us up. The ground warming from a volcano is not from C02 - it's from the mantle plume under the volcano - they are close to the surface so actually warm the ground they sit under. There is a major plume under parts of Africa right now and it is thought that there is one under Antarctica. The one under Yellowstone is so close to the surface that the ground has topped 200 degrees in places there.

Gore is finished - sued by scientists who want REAL science back and deplore this clamp and editing that has been put on scientific info for the purpose of monetary gain. It will take awhile for word to get out though because there are one heck of a lot of non-profits getting funding from this farce and they aren't going to willingly give up their funding sources.

Al Gore was right. Since he invented the internet, CO2 has been increasing at an even faster rate.

LMAO

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[13833].message }}

greymatrixx

16 years ago

"If you look at the data, I think we can see a trend here."

No we cannot...Thats the bottom line...Al Gore is at best incorrect...or a paid liar.

Honest Paul...The bedrock state of play on this subject is below...

4...CO2 as the prime cause of global warming has not yet been validated its still a theory.

In a 1996 report by the UN on global warming, two statements were deleted from the final draft. Here they are:

1) None of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases.

2) No study to date has positively attributed all or part of the climate change to man made causes. To the present day there is still no scientific proof that man-made CO2 causes significant global warming.

See "Carbon dioxide rebellion" edition 6 of RHS1 Earthwatch...

Though out 2007/8 Hundreds of media reports from all over the planet have been read and considered,here at RHS1, dozens of scientific papers researched, in the past few days media reports examined still repeat and quote as fact information that has been shown, demonstrated, definitively to be wrong, untrue, incorrect.

Whatever you believe about global warming/climate change, you do well to take heed here, you cannot have full confidence in what you read in the mass written media about global warming/climate change.

Now I am not going to waste my time here demonstrating errors, the real problem is that many of these errors are used as fact as proof of opinion and projections of concequenses. Such forward thinking based on error may be termed "logical fantasies".

See current edition of RHS1 Earthwatch...

Indiana...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[14134].message }}

Melkor

16 years ago

1996 was a long time ago, dude. Read less conspiracy theory and more theoretical physics, and you'll have an easier time of it seeing through the obfuscation spread by certain energy interests.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

organic gardening | Organic Vegetable Gardening
Free DoFollow backlinks for your sites

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[14151].message }}

Barry Walls

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Melkor

Read less conspiracy theory

The "catch all" thought stopper.

9000 PHDs are sueing Al Gore...I think thats pretty heavy evidence of what the scientific community thinks of him...the argument about whether or not consipracy theorists believe its a scam detracts from the science.

Nasa climatologists laugh at CO2 caused global warming. They've given plenty of interviews about it on their way to the secret base on Mars.

Ooops...Ive said too much.

Thanks
3 replies

Signature

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[14895].message }}

Tiger 16 years ago

We are getting cooler, not warmer :

LINK
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[14920].message }}
HeySal 16 years ago

It's not just climate - any of the sciences controlled by government censureship and monetary interests gets zapped. Archaeology is another one that real info rarely makes it to the public if the find is controversial enough. For some reason it is bad for us to know the truth about human history. And religion - who has access to, or can read the language of original documents? Most have been edited through the ages to a point where they are almost not the same documentation. King James had Chaucer to a real hack job on the bible.
How about health - we read all about the coming pandemics and have a few pharms that are highly advertised (tamiflu-brought to you by Donald Rumsfeld and financial pals) - yet the cure for virus is as simple as massive doses of ascorbic acid, which, if you land in the hospital due to flu, will not be given to you unless you demand it.
I could go on but you get the point -- the only information the public ever receives, is either doctored and packaged to be advantageous to the top few, or it is leaked to us and often ignored because of "slip programming" which allows us to automatically deny truth as soon as it is labeled "conspiracy theory". That is not to say that conspiracy theories don't exist - just that any time information is denied vehemently enough or is pushed hard enough, we need to start looking to find the truths, because they aren't in front of us.
- Thanks
Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[14946].message }}

Melkor

16 years ago

Originally Posted by bigjock

Argument from numbers again? I thought we were done with that particular fallacy - and anyone can sue anyone for anything, doesn't mean there's anything to it. $50 and some paperwork buys you a lawsuit on file in the municipal court in Podunk, Wyoming, doesn't mean there's a chance in hell that you'll win it.

What I find ironic is that apart from our little disagreement over global warming I'd be right there with Sal; you only have to look at all the crap that's been pulled in the name on the War on A Tactic of Warfare to know that the present war is a War on Liberty and not what it says on the label.

There are conspiracy theories and conspiracy theories as well. If you listen too much to CIA cointelpro operatives Alex Jones and Art Bell you're going to start using terminology that gets you labelled as "harmless nutbar" when you try to get the word out. Y'all would want to question the false memes Jones et.al are planting in the public conciousness to get people to automatically dismiss what the military-industrial complex is really up to as more of the same lunatic nonsense as they're sprouting.

Y'all would want to look at the economic footprints and check where the money is flowing to see who's really out to distort your reality-filter though. Any one of the scientists on the IPCC, CICERO, NASA's climatogical research groups or anywhere else could instantly quadruple their salary for one-tenth the work if they were willing to jump ship and go work for the AEI or PNAC in the global warming denial business.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

organic gardening | Organic Vegetable Gardening
Free DoFollow backlinks for your sites

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[15140].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Melkor - college and University classes are one of the first places you can find "indoctrination information". Sometimes you have to go higher than the classrooms to find what is real. AMA doctors are taught in classes designed and approved by pharmaceutical companies. Dentists were tightly taught the advantages of fluoride in our water, thanks be to the industries that were not allowed to dump this toxic waste -solution: get people to drink it. New research has proven the dangers of all but periodic and light topical use and shown that fluoride is an extremely dangerous neurotoxin and carcinogenic -- and the push to put it in water WORLDWIDE is raging even when there is now proof that it is poisonous and will KILL US.

Where did the material about C02 you studied in school come from?

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[15171].message }}

Melkor

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

Fluoride in the drinking water is an extremely bad idea, yes - you only have to look at the hazarduous materials data sheet for it to know that this isn't something you want floating around in unknown concentrations at random.

Is anyone outside of Alex Jones or Dr. Strangelove talking about fluoridation of drinking water though? I mean, even dentists who are notoriously conervative have finally caught on to the notion that putting toxic heavy metals into people's teeth may not be an idea of award-winning brilliance, as seen by the way they're phasing out mercury fillings. And as far as I'm aware, teh fluoridation idea went away before Kubrick made his movie - what you might see to this day is chlorination of the water. Tastes like blah, and it's not a good idea to breathe it, but since it exists in the environment and your body in large quantities already it's something your body can process under normal circumstances (NaCl, ordinary table salt, is 50% chlorine.)

You can test the CO2 characteristics yourself, you know. Get a glass container with a known energy transparancy profile, and send infrared radiation through it from a controllable source, measure how much energy makes it out to the other side when the container is filled with nitrogen. Replace the nitrogen with CO2, repeat the experiment and see how much energy makes it through at different wavelengths this time. Measure how the temperature inside the container changes as you send infrared energy through it both times, and you'll see how much more energy CO2 absorbs at any specific wavelength. Use that to calculate how much the temperature should have risen inside the jar and check against the temperature measurements you actually got.

If you've done it right, you'll know where the energy went into the system, and how it behaved while it was in there, and the wavelengths it radiated at, at which infrared wavelengths were blocked. This translates to specific temperatures, and while the math is a bit nasty you can check everything by hand if you have to - it's one of the many fun experiments we did in physical chemistry class.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

organic gardening | Organic Vegetable Gardening
Free DoFollow backlinks for your sites

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[15271].message }}

Tiger

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Melkor

Is anyone outside of Alex Jones or Dr. Strangelove talking about fluoridation of drinking water though?

Congress was contacted about it by 600 professionals:

LINK

LINK

Thanks
2 replies

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[15557].message }}

Melkor 16 years ago

Huh. My bad - I must not have been paying attention when I was under the impression that fluoridation was ended in 1974. Thanks!
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
organic gardening | Organic Vegetable Gardening
Free DoFollow backlinks for your sites
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[15610].message }}
- Tiger 16 years ago
  
  You are welcome. I never do drink public water, but at the same
  time I dont know how much of the fluoride is taken out of
  the bottled water....:confused:
  
  When I learned where fluoride came from ( left over
  as aluminum waste ) I immediately knew it was not
  something that should go into my body.
  
  /Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[15733].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Tiger

Congress was contacted about it by 600 professionals:

LINK

LINK

Water fluoridation is right now a very hot topic. All research done has shown fluoride to be poisonous - yet there is a campaign to fluoridate the WHOLE WORLD. What do you suppose that is about? Health? Suuuuure it is. Fluoride will actually damage your teeth - bones, cause cancer, and is a neuro toxin. It has been proven to reduce intelligence - I could go on.

It was a group of over 1,200 professionals that told Congress to illegalize fluoride in your water. The group has now grown to 1,700. The Fluoride Action Network is now getting ready to go to Toronto for a world class convention which will re-educate leaders about fluoridation which is still being pushed by big money rather than science (incidentally, fluroide is a by-product from industry and because it is illegal to dump it because of the harm it does to the enviornment, the only way they can get rid of it is to force us to drink it).

If you don't find fluoride frightning now - check out all of the research results (all of which show the dangers of the poison) and see some of the debates that Connet (sp?) has had with fluoride promoters - he has mega facts, they have nothing.

You can find out all about fluoride, health hazards, and even whether your own community is poisoning your water or not - and view the latest info about the poison and view debates, etc - at Fluoride Action Network

What you don't know could kill you.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[20463].message }}

Mike Wright

16 years ago

Boils some water... make tea .... drink it.
Most of the unwanted gunk stays in the kettle.

There is a case for drinking bottled water in third world countries
like ours .... but beer, wine and spirits have advantages over designer water.

Coffee drinkers get headaches, hypertension and poor sleep quality.

More tea Vicar? OMMMMMMMM OMMMMMMMM OMMMMMMMMM ......

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[20523].message }}

HeySal

16 years ago

Originally Posted by Mike Wright

The only way to get fluoride out of water is with reverse osmosis.

After seeing the brain effects of fluoride - I think our Congress and Your parliment
are getting plenty!

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

Sal
When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
Beyond the Path

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[20546].message }}

GeorgettaSterling

16 years ago

Originally Posted by HeySal

The only way to get fluoride out of water is with reverse osmosis.

After seeing the brain effects of fluoride - I think our Congress and Your parliment
are getting plenty!

You can also remove fluorides from drinking water using adsorption onto filter media. Granular activated alumina (aluminum oxide) is one such adsorbent that removes fluoride from water without adding anything to the water. It is available in filter cartridges, much like activated carbon.

Fluoride is a nasty component in anything - chemically fluorides are extremely reactive and aggressive, and I am constantly amazed that anyone would consider purposely adding them to drinking water (or toothpaste, mouthwash...let alone smearing sodium fluoride gel onto your teeth after professional cleaning). Most fluoride chemicals are powerful free radical formers and because of the very small size of the fluoride ion and its mobility, it tends to persist in the body and replace "natural" ions and groups like carbonates and oxides (which are essential for bone and tooth strength).

Calcium fluoride, which is essentially what forms in your teeth during fluoridation, is a weak, crumbly mineral. Just how did anyone get the idea that this would "strengthen" teeth?

Regards, Georgetta

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[22721].message }}

Barry Walls 16 years ago

its the same argument the IPCC is using to beat people over the head with....numbers.

So you are saying that 30,000 scientists have been bought by "Big Oil"...hmmm....ok.

For a scientist, you have a pretty low opinion of your peer group, Id say.
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[15178].message }}

GeorgettaSterling

16 years ago

Originally Posted by myob

I cannot comment on your numbers (although I have a problem with the "human activity emits 132x as much CO2 as volcanos" one). I CAN comment on a very important number not in your analysis - the percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere that HUMANS are responsible for. Despite our penchant for massive pollution and ridiculous misuse of carbon-based fuels, human activity is responsible for less than 3% of the atmospheric CO2.

If we did all the dumb stuff that the carbon-nazis are suggesting, and essentially threw mankind back into the stone age (and eliminated 90% plus of the human population in the process) we would still not exert any appreciable change on the CO2-based greenhouse effect. Despite our ridiculous behavior on this planet, we don't really matter.

THAT is why the climate change rhetoric is so profoundly stupid. It is junk science of the worst kind, because it ignores one of the fundamental principles I was taught in Engineering school - first look at large effects (e.g. consider the "order of magnitude"). The erosion of Mt. Everest releases more CO2 into the atmosphere than all human activity combined - do we moan about those "darn mountains ruining our climate"??? When an underwater volcano breaks up to the surface and starts heating part of the ocean, more CO2 is released than decades of human activity. Are we going to cap underwater volcanos?

I am not for a moment suggesting that we don't curb our energy usage or, even more importantly, our pollution releases. That is an acute problem that requires immediate and sustained attention. Air pollution in most major cities is a significant cause of shortened human life (and more disease in general). We need to spend our resources wisely to improve our lives on this planet, not to satisfy some con-artists spouting junk science as part of a covert tax grab.

IMHO.

Best Regards, Georgetta

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[22747].message }}

Barry Walls 16 years ago

Well Said Georgetta!
- Thanks
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[23044].message }}

colinredk 16 years ago

Several things on my mind about the thoughts expressed here.

Yes, Bigjock, the cyclical nature of climate change is real. The last ice age was 20,000 years ago and we are overdue for one. We're late for that cycle.

Heysal is correct in saying that volcanoes have a negligible contribution to CO2 emissions. Volcano eruptions contribute more ash than CO2 and the net effect is a global cooling by about 2 to 3 degrees Fahrenheit for about 2 years after the explosion. And forest fires contribute more CO2 emissions than volcanoes.

Since the thread has dissed scientists and politicians, I won't go there. I'd like to point out some things which have been proven to be true. Mainly quirky weather.

The ice caps are melting. It takes a lot of energy to melt the icecaps. In fact, a european team of scientists have been studying the northwest passage these past couple of years. And there are now commercial studies on running tankers down that route.

Another large slice of the Antarctic ice shelf split from Antarctica. And more are ice splits are expected in the near future.

In the Himalayas, there are more Everest climbers, than before. Thanks in part because the ice is creeping upwards. Ice is no longer found at lower altitudes than before.

There are more jellyfish attack on the US coast. And the jellyfish are now in great quantities even as north as New England. Jellyfish thrive and breed in warm waters. And the trend of growth and geographic incidence shows that the waters off New England have been getting warmer.

The western Sahara is getting warmer. The winds from that area sweep over the Atlantic and spawn hurricanes. The warmer the winds, the more numerous and stronger the hurricanes spawned. Think of Hurricane Katrina, just more, and stronger.

I don't really care what the scientists or what NASA say. I'm just holding on tight because we are all in for a bumpy ride.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
Signature
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[23999].message }}
- HeySal 16 years ago
  
  Ice sheets falling aren't always due to warming - seismic activity can cause major cities and landscapes to crumble. If you think that no ice was restored at the Northern cap areas during this last winter then you are reading propeganda instead of viewing recent satellite pictures - more ice there than the last 15 years and, yes, it does melt during the summer, no matter what outside of an ice age. I'm not sure why anyone that is able to click around and see temperatures for vast parts of the globe and compare them with temps from the last few years could actually believe that we are still in a warming trend.
  And as far as scientists who did some major backpedaling during the last excessively harsh winter stating that cooling is part of warming - the reverse is also true - you get short periods of warming during cooling as well.
  Now I am off to find some heavier clothing. If someone out there is actually in a warming trend, I'd sure like to go there, it's wayyy cold here for this time of year.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  Sal
  When the Roads and Paths end, learn to guide yourself through the wilderness
  Beyond the Path
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[24206].message }}
  
  GeorgettaSterling 16 years ago
  
  I hear the "ice caps are melting" claim a lot, particularly on US TV (from the Gore-ites, probably). Except that for at least the last 3 years, the ice cap at the N. Pole has been GROWING significantly. It was larger this past winter than it has been in something like a decade. And it is about the same size as it has been for the last half-century. This is according to polar researchers, as reported on the CBC. The polar ice cap (N. Pole) grows and shrinks in cycles, and if anything, the researchers suggest it is growing slightly versus the 50 year average.
  
  By the way, in the Al Gore movie, there is this inflammatory picture of a polar bear standing on a tiny ice floe looking very forlorn. That happens quite often - they swim from floe to floe. The bear is just fine, and isn't "lacking" ice. The photographer of that picture was also interviewed on the CBC and said that the bear was actually surrounded by ice - the picture just made it look like all he had was this little sliver. He also said that he managed to capture a look of "sadness" on the bear's face, when in fact most of the time the bear looked "menacing" and the photographer and his crew had serious fears that the bear would actually eat them.
  
  And about more icebergs and such (which is part of ice caps "shrinking") - HeySal is right about seismic activity causing increased calving. Pollution also plays a part in reducing the strength of southern parts of N. Pole ice, resulting in increased ice breakage (one of my classmates did his Master's thesis on the effects of environmental contaminants on water crystal e.g. ice, strength, and for giant blocks of ice, more contaminants generally = lower strength, more breakage and more icebergs and less ice caps). Note that just because the ice CAP is smaller, doesn't mean the total ice volume is less - if there are more ice bergs floating around.
  
  Best Regards, Georgetta
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[25169].message }}
  
  Tiger 16 years ago
  
  "There are many credible members of the scientific community who have questioned the theory of global warming, and now we have some scientists actually suggesting the earth's temperatures may be entering a period of dramatic cooling," said Doherty, R-Warren and Hunterdon. "With this growing level of scientific uncertainty, it makes no sense to enact a new set of economically damaging regulations prompted by the global warming hysteria of recent years."
  
  LINK
  
  LINK
  
  /Steve
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[26589].message }}
  
  Barry Walls 16 years ago
  
  I think we win....we seem to have crushed the resistance!
  
  Look here...I remember 30 years ago we were told we were going into a new ice age...why don't they just tell us that they won't be happy until we are all living in mud huts working in fields...then everyone knows where they stand!
  
  Bloody carbon taxes...where does that money go?
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  Signature
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[27829].message }}
  
  myob 16 years ago
  
  The crushing blow won't be known for sure for perhaps hundred of years. We'll either see the end of civilization, or hundreds of billions of dollars in profits for Gore et al as the world spins and BS flings.
  
  Thanks
  
  1 reply
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[29869].message }}
  
  pcalvert 16 years ago
  
  An "infinitely thick" atmosphere?
  
  Researcher: Basic Greenhouse Equations "Totally Wrong"
  
  Phil
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  "If a cat sits on a hot stove, that cat won't sit on a hot stove again.
  That cat won't sit on a cold stove either." - Mark Twain
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[56680].message }}

ccna2000 Banned 16 years ago

[DELETED]

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[16783].message }}
- Jelasco 16 years ago
  
  "Manmade global warming" is the biggest hoax ever perpetuated. It's all about expanding government and socialism.
  
  And Gore uses 10-100 times the energy that most of us do, the hypocrite. Did you know he has ownership in a company selling carbon credits?
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[19401].message }}
Chris Lockwood 16 years ago

The global warming hoax is all about advancing socialism and increasing the wealth of people like Gore.
- Thanks
Signature
Comprehensive membership site training
My other blog
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[97005].message }}

CO2 and Climate change - my pet hate

Trending Topics

Any thoughts on golf's latest phenom...Scottie Scheffler??

What's the Best IM-Related Skill to Learn Today That Can Help in the Future?

The Twilight Zone

best high quality crypto traffic.

Some interesting stats about brand comms